MMRDVN

472 posts

MMRDVN banner
MMRDVN

MMRDVN

@mmrdvn

CTO @ Sadie / Moonlighting as Director of Engineering at my corpo day job.

Montreal Beigetreten Ağustos 2022
333 Folgt110 Follower
MMRDVN
MMRDVN@mmrdvn·
@martin_casado why would you want to set a precedent that you will bark when someone asks you to. he’s forced to do this i think
English
0
0
2
141
martin_casado
martin_casado@martin_casado·
“The Admin asked Dario to fix the jailbreak or de-deploy the model. Dario refused. — In their blog post, Anthropic defended its decision by saying the jailbreak isn’t serious. “ This is crazy. What are we even doing here?
David Sacks@DavidSacks

I’ve had a number of conversations with folks inside and outside government about the current situation with Anthropic, and here is what I believe to be true: — As we know, Anthropic publicly released its Mythos class models earlier this week under the commercial name Fable. — Fable is Mythos with guardrails. But if those guardrails fail, then you’ve exposed Mythos and its advanced cyber capabilities to people who shouldn’t have them. (Keep in mind that Anthropic itself widely promoted the idea that Mythos was a cyberweapon and needed to be regulated as such. They asked for government regulation of Mythos and championed the guardrails on Fable. If there is a vulnerability — big or small — it is Anthropic’s responsibility to patch.) — A highly credible trusted partner of both Anthropic and the USG who was testing Fable came forward with a jailbreak of those guardrails. The Admin asked Dario to fix the jailbreak or de-deploy the model. Dario refused. — In their blog post, Anthropic defended its decision by saying the jailbreak isn’t serious. That is not what the trusted partner and the USG believe; nor is that kind of minimizing language consistent with Anthropic’s brand as the AI safety company. It’s difficult to fathom how they could claim a jailbreak allowing operability of a cyber weapon could be defined as not “serious.” — In the past, Anthropic has always said that safety must be top priority and taken super seriously. In this case, Anthropic prioritized the continued offering of the consumer model over safety. — In reaction, the Admin issued the export control. The Admin did this reluctantly. It’s been very surprised that Anthropic hasn’t wanted to cooperate with a reasonable safety request (ie fixing the jailbreak issue). Anthropic’s reaction is very much at odds with their branding and ethos as a safe AI research community. — The Admin’s hope now is that Anthropic remediates the safety issue, the export control is lifted, and Fable goes back into general release. The Admin wants all of this to happen as soon as possible. It is frankly bewildered that Anthropic hasn’t wanted to comply with safety requests that it previously said were its highest priority. — Those trying to misdirect and tie this action to the prior DoW/Anthropic issues are wrong. The Admin values Anthropic’s technical capabilities and feels that this issue, while serious, should be easily resolved. The ball is in Anthropic’s court.

English
78
29
741
274.1K
MMRDVN
MMRDVN@mmrdvn·
@signulll @DavidSacks my take it sets a precedent if he complies. you’re basically saying to the world that we are going to shut down business when someone else thinks our model can do something it shouldn’t.
English
6
0
10
2.2K
signüll
signüll@signulll·
@DavidSacks super interesting. wonder why dario refused?
English
86
1
521
43.8K
David Sacks
David Sacks@DavidSacks·
I’ve had a number of conversations with folks inside and outside government about the current situation with Anthropic, and here is what I believe to be true: — As we know, Anthropic publicly released its Mythos class models earlier this week under the commercial name Fable. — Fable is Mythos with guardrails. But if those guardrails fail, then you’ve exposed Mythos and its advanced cyber capabilities to people who shouldn’t have them. (Keep in mind that Anthropic itself widely promoted the idea that Mythos was a cyberweapon and needed to be regulated as such. They asked for government regulation of Mythos and championed the guardrails on Fable. If there is a vulnerability — big or small — it is Anthropic’s responsibility to patch.) — A highly credible trusted partner of both Anthropic and the USG who was testing Fable came forward with a jailbreak of those guardrails. The Admin asked Dario to fix the jailbreak or de-deploy the model. Dario refused. — In their blog post, Anthropic defended its decision by saying the jailbreak isn’t serious. That is not what the trusted partner and the USG believe; nor is that kind of minimizing language consistent with Anthropic’s brand as the AI safety company. It’s difficult to fathom how they could claim a jailbreak allowing operability of a cyber weapon could be defined as not “serious.” — In the past, Anthropic has always said that safety must be top priority and taken super seriously. In this case, Anthropic prioritized the continued offering of the consumer model over safety. — In reaction, the Admin issued the export control. The Admin did this reluctantly. It’s been very surprised that Anthropic hasn’t wanted to cooperate with a reasonable safety request (ie fixing the jailbreak issue). Anthropic’s reaction is very much at odds with their branding and ethos as a safe AI research community. — The Admin’s hope now is that Anthropic remediates the safety issue, the export control is lifted, and Fable goes back into general release. The Admin wants all of this to happen as soon as possible. It is frankly bewildered that Anthropic hasn’t wanted to comply with safety requests that it previously said were its highest priority. — Those trying to misdirect and tie this action to the prior DoW/Anthropic issues are wrong. The Admin values Anthropic’s technical capabilities and feels that this issue, while serious, should be easily resolved. The ball is in Anthropic’s court.
English
2.2K
3.2K
25.3K
7.7M
Jeremy Howard
Jeremy Howard@jeremyphoward·
In order to see if the gov response was predictable, I pasted the wiki page about the Anthropic/DoD dispute into ChatGPT Pro, & told it Anthropic had released a model where it restricted use because it may be too dangerous. tldr: "almost tailor-made to trigger" the government.
Jeremy Howard tweet media
English
42
29
371
51.9K
MMRDVN
MMRDVN@mmrdvn·
@MartinShkreli Is everything just thinking with their dick lmao ?
English
0
0
0
321
Martin Shkreli
Martin Shkreli@MartinShkreli·
its not even clear there is a mortality benefit in PAH!!!! imagine thinking this is useful for healthies.
English
16
3
290
64.7K
Kino ☀︎
Kino ☀︎@tabinokino·
@mmrdvn @takezeasy @VictorTaelin There is far far more money in gatekeeping the good models from the plebs than there is in the mass subscriber model would guess 2-4 orders of magnitude more
English
2
0
2
853
Taelin
Taelin@VictorTaelin·
great fucking job, Anthropic incredible fear-mongering fuck progress, fuck science, fuck technology fuck the whole world except for US let's all go to the stone age together
English
186
268
6.3K
232.3K
MMRDVN
MMRDVN@mmrdvn·
@takezeasy @VictorTaelin What do you think a multiple on their internal value would be when they ipo. Do you think that’s anywhere near what they make while subsidizing the model serving it to us.
English
2
0
6
1.4K
MMRDVN
MMRDVN@mmrdvn·
@boristane Any engineer not posting this shit rn is performative, pips coming on monday from me
English
0
0
0
105
Daniel
Daniel@growing_daniel·
This is all part of Dario’s plan. No way it was sustainable to run mythos for everyone. This is incredible aura going into an IPO
English
94
66
2.5K
136K
MMRDVN
MMRDVN@mmrdvn·
@mil000 still will go 0/50 at a bar however
English
1
0
1
151
Milo Smith
Milo Smith@mil000·
fable 5 being shut down will bring sf tech bros outside like how a power outage makes kids go outside again
English
3
7
183
6.9K
MMRDVN
MMRDVN@mmrdvn·
@AndrewCurran_ What do you think about this being IPO bait a la gpt2 is wayyyy to dangerous to release?
English
0
0
4
195
Andrew Curran
Andrew Curran@AndrewCurran_·
With this context, the extreme guardrails on Fable 5 that everyone was complaining about make more sense. It looks like Anthropic implemented them in response to government pressure not to release Fable 5 or Mythos 5 at all. They were hoping it would be enough, but it wasn't.
Andrew Curran@AndrewCurran_

The Trump administration has placed Anthropic's Mythos 5 and Fable 5 under export controls. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick sent a letter to Dario Amodei tonight stating that foreign governments, companies, and individuals will no longer have access to either model.

English
25
33
497
67K
MMRDVN
MMRDVN@mmrdvn·
@karrisaarinen the real big brain move is just hire those who can do 7 days of work in 4-5. Seems like a skill gap here.
English
0
0
1
602
Karri Saarinen
Karri Saarinen@karrisaarinen·
In grindmaxxing there are a couple of questions inside it. First question is that whether you should do it or not, and to what level. I don’t think there is one right answer because it is situational and plays into the dynamics of the market. Most startups the mode is either finding PMF or scaling that. PMF is about building, talking to customers and learning from those activities. There is some level of grind involved but I think the risk of too much grind and you don't internalize the learnings enough to correct the path. The speed makes you blind. Then at scaling, there can be grind because the business is booming, but goal should be finding leverage to scale effectively. With leadership, hiring, with processes, software, anything. Then there can be higher urgency when you are in some landgrab moment where there is real advantage in being first. Many will over-index on being the first, often it doesn't matter the way you think it would. It matters when you learn from it, because you gain advantage being the first to learn, not because you somehow automatically capture the market and can keep it. Often in reality doesn't really matter much if someone comes later with lot better product or experience. Customer will gravitate to the better solution, not to the solution that was first. And I think you can be fast in different ways. You can be very fast but have a very inefficient model. Or you can have a very efficient model and use less effort to the get same speed. The latter will might be slower at first, but will be more compounding and more scalable in long run. For example in the beginning, you might be onboarding every customer. But eventually you have to realize it probably won’t scale, your and your team's time is not leveraged well, you don't learn much from repeating that over and over. You have to find leverage from the product, or some other solution that doesn’t require as many human hours. So many startups and teams do have to work a lot and intensively. But there will always be a tradeoff to consider. Teams will burn out. Mistakes will happen. Bad decisions will be made. A lot of the work might be wasteful if the team never stops to consider. Sometimes it is not an option. You have to grind through it. I get that. But you as a founder can still choose the culture, the values, the operating principles. Is it based on grind, or is it based on something else? Grind is not always optional, but culture built around grind is. -- And second questions which the most interesting part to me, which is always optional, if you make the grind as part of the narrative and the brand. Does the grind narrative actually make your brand better or more valuable for customers? I’d argue only a few businesses benefit from the grind narrative. Most probably do not. For example, when I joined Coinbase early, we knew that trust was the most important thing. We had to be secure and project stability and trust. That was what I was also trying to do with design. The team also did it on the legal side by trying to be the trusted option operating from the US instead of the Caymans or China or somewhere else (many of those are now gone). In the aspect of trust, in domains where you want high trust and stability, like banking, security, databases, payments, insurance, infrastructure, etc., the grindmaxxing narrative doesn’t make me trust the vendor more. It makes me trust it less. Because it makes me think about the mistakes that might eventually happen, or the risk complete implosion of the vendor. I always evaluate vendors on their culture and brand. I want my vendors trustworthy and operating values that provide stability. We’ve picked vendors over others because we sensed stability and a kind of unhurried expertise. And often we have picked right. I don’t want to buy vendors and then have them create problems for us, or force us to find another vendor a couple years later. When you work in a high-trust domain and sell to businesses, the better story is almost how stable and boring your operations are. I want people operating in healthy way, making solid decisions, focusing on operational excellence not building cafes, sleeping at the office or other various side quests.
Karri Saarinen@karrisaarinen

The fallacy of this is that more creates more. More hours, more hiring, more something. And it is true in a sense. If you put in more work, more work will happen. But I think for most startups, the leverage is really in how differently you approach the problem, how well you cultivate your team, and the strategy. Any large company can outspend you on hours. They have thousands or tens of thousands more people, spending more hours. If hours worked were the metric, every large company and government organization would always win and do the best work. More hours, better output. This thinking is often representative of younger founders, where the startup becomes their identity and life. They have a hard time doing anything else, and cannot understand that your work is not the person that is you. But activities outside of work can grow you as a person too and make you do better work. I’ve never worked this way. As a designer, I always saw the need to take a step back, to take a break. At times, I might work 12 hours or 16 hours, or whatever amount was needed, but it wasn’t the norm. You just can't grind design, you need inspiration. But taking that step away from the work, would give me more perspective, inspiration and I could approach the problem differently or I could just see the solution. Grinding is never good for any creative problem, and startups or creating new products are often mostly about creative problem solving. Grinding works ok for email jobs, or where you just executing on very clear playbook. With Linear, we’ve never worked this way. We work reasonable hours, 5 days a week. All of us founders have families. Many of our employees have families. I personally stop every evening, spend time with the family, cook dinner for the family, eat dinner together, and focus on things outside of work. Sometimes I work in the late evenings or weekends, but to me the pride is that I don’t need to. Company should be succesful without it. My goal is to build a company that is sustainable in the long term, and doesn’t require heroics or personal sacrifices every single day. There are times when our team is heroic. Launches, incidents, some other work that just needs to be done. They will work late into the night because they know it is the right thing. But we don’t require that every day or every week, and the more this happens, the more I think it is a failure of our company and leadership. The team and the leaders should always keep a reserve to use when something is needed. Our thinking was also that quality, which we value, doesn’t emerge from working more or stressing people more. It emerges when you create the conditions for it to emerge. Often it is the appreciation, space, time, and how the person feels. A person who is rested will do better work. I wouldn’t attribute much of our success to working a lot. The success came from having clear thinking, ideas, and focus to do the right things. I sometimes wish we could move the culture more toward a Zen master. Real mastery is not exerting the most effort. It is achieving the outcome with the least necessary effort.

English
22
16
411
43.2K
MMRDVN
MMRDVN@mmrdvn·
@mil000 Sole proprietor core
Italiano
0
0
3
125
Milo Smith
Milo Smith@mil000·
What does the word “founder” even mean anymore
English
7
0
39
3.7K
MMRDVN
MMRDVN@mmrdvn·
@gabriel1 Over the years I can trigger flow state with specific albums. I agree that it can 100% be a drug. Probably the biggest booster for me (even better than nicotine).
English
0
0
0
134
gabriel
gabriel@gabriel1·
people seem unaware of the wide span of pleasure between people when it comes to music some people barely react to music, some have their peak moments in life from music
English
5
5
159
37.2K
MMRDVN retweetet
Anshu
Anshu@anshuc·
@github holy shit, how did the attackers find a large enough uptime window to get in?
English
177
696
14.5K
957.5K